I believe that if they decide to permanently ban someone, they should at least maybe take away ALL their chat privileges permanently, but permanently banning someone from the game is ridiculous. If they take all of their chat privelegs away where they cant type, but they can see the chat, it would solve everything, That way the player couldnt be toxic, but he could still play on his account he spent SO much money on.
RiotSlumber Jack11 votesThe reason we permanently suspend players is because they either exhibit the potential to do something really terrible, or because they go an extended period of time creating pain for others and show no interest or ability to reform.
The idea behind reform is to help a player understand that what they're doing is damaging to others, and simply taking away chat completely doesn't solve this because they fail to put into practice their understanding of what is right/wrong. Chat restrictions in their current form are pretty good at this because you have to think more often about the most effective use of your chat; do I want to use my limited chat to work towards winning/helping, or to harass?
To make my point clear, in the game for which you were permanently suspended you were also threatening to feed the enemy team. Removing chat privileges altogether likely would not have prevented you from continuing to cause pain.
B Luv2 votes[{quoted}](name=Slumber Jack,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=ckYH3Vtp,comment-id=0005,timestamp=2015-11-20T23:52:11.199+0000)
The reason we permanently suspend players is because they either exhibit the potential to do something really terrible, or because they go an extended period of time creating pain for others and show no interest or ability to reform.
The idea behind reform is to help a player understand that what they're doing is damaging to others, and simply taking away chat completely doesn't solve this because they fail to put into practice their understanding of what is right/wrong. Chat restrictions in their current form are pretty good at this because you have to think more often about the most effective use of your chat; do I want to use my limited chat to work towards winning/helping, or to harass?
To make my point clear, in the game for which you were permanently suspended you were also threatening to feed the enemy team. Removing chat privileges altogether likely would not have prevented you from continuing to cause pain.
Why does "reform" have to be a thing, what if there are some people who are mentally uncapable of reforming how they act towards people, say for instance. Someone with tourettes goes into a game and constantly cusses because he knows no better and never will, would it be fair to remove him from the game completely because he cant control his mouth due to a mental setback? Instead, you could just remove his chat privileges and he could still enjoy a game he loves to play.
Sneak Dog3 votesFirst of all, cursing is accepted. Flaming others is not. Secondly, communication is vital in this game. Thirdly, does tourettes affect chat? I don't know.
So if that player is consistently making other people feel horrible, then it's totally fine to ban him. Perhaps playing social online games just isn't the right thing to do for him.
Samus722 votes[{quoted}](name=Sneak Dog,realm=EUW,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=ckYH3Vtp,comment-id=000500000000,timestamp=2015-11-21T11:58:33.937+0000)
First of all, cursing is accepted. Flaming others is not. Secondly, communication is vital in this game. Thirdly, does tourettes affect chat? I don't know.
So if that player is consistently making other people feel horrible, then it's totally fine to ban him. Perhaps playing social online games just isn't the right thing to do for him.
I hate that slippery slope. "I was cussing but I wasn't cussing at you." I do not understand why Riot allows such a rule.
There are ways to communicate in the game that do not include chat.
I do have some experience with those who have tourettes. It does not transfer to their written or typed work. It's a verbal or physical malady. The worst that would happen while someone was typing when hit by an "attack" is they would stop typing until it passed.
IIStanleyII3 votesReplies to comments on the post, but doesn't address the purpose of the post. Just something that someone else misconstrued. In no way did "B Luv" Ask Why an account was suspended permanently. He addressed the amount of money someone put into it. And was looking for thoughts on that. GJ Riot. -_-
Lonely Flame2 votesWhat are you talking about? He addressed the issue. OP was saying that players shouldn't be perma-banned, only perma-chat banned. Slumber Jack explained the whole point of the ban system in general is to prevent toxic behaviour, and that things such as intentionally feeding (for which OP was banned for) aren't stopped by a perma-chat ban, so OP's suggestion is moot. How does that not address the post?
MinkyMan1 votes[{quoted}](name=Slumber Jack,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=ckYH3Vtp,comment-id=0005,timestamp=2015-11-20T23:52:11.199+0000)
The reason we permanently suspend players is because they either exhibit the potential to do something really terrible, or because they go an extended period of time creating pain for others and show no interest or ability to reform.
The idea behind reform is to help a player understand that what they're doing is damaging to others, and simply taking away chat completely doesn't solve this because they fail to put into practice their understanding of what is right/wrong. Chat restrictions in their current form are pretty good at this because you have to think more often about the most effective use of your chat; do I want to use my limited chat to work towards winning/helping, or to harass?
To make my point clear, in the game for which you were permanently suspended you were also threatening to feed the enemy team. Removing chat privileges altogether likely would not have prevented you from continuing to cause pain.
Could you possibly answer my post about being perm banned? I do not think I deserved it and I am still waiting on a response :/
Kat Head1 votes[{quoted}](name=Slumber Jack,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=ckYH3Vtp,comment-id=0005,timestamp=2015-11-20T23:52:11.199+0000)
The reason we permanently suspend players is because they either exhibit the potential to do something really terrible, or because they go an extended period of time creating pain for others and show no interest or ability to reform.
The idea behind reform is to help a player understand that what they're doing is damaging to others, and simply taking away chat completely doesn't solve this because they fail to put into practice their understanding of what is right/wrong. Chat restrictions in their current form are pretty good at this because you have to think more often about the most effective use of your chat; do I want to use my limited chat to work towards winning/helping, or to harass?
To make my point clear, in the game for which you were permanently suspended you were also threatening to feed the enemy team. Removing chat privileges altogether likely would not have prevented you from continuing to cause pain.
In the instances where people are toxic in chat and there alone, Riot should totally perma chat ban them.
While this is technically true, permanently disabled chat isn't really a solution to verbal toxicity because it addresses the symptoms and not the disease. As Wuks mentioned, someone who is upset, frustrated or simply doesn't care can always find other ways to be toxic.
There were some very interesting studies a few years back that showed that venting in a safe, controlled environment didn't lead to less loss of control incidents. It led to more. It makes sense when you think about it. Developing self-control requires discipline and practice. Put another way, you don't practice eating healthy by treating yourself to a whole pie after a good weigh-in.
Riot uses chat restrictions as a way to identify people who are incapable of change, then they ban those people and ask them to play other games.
But they dont play other games, they make smurfs and do it all over again. This time running off more new players with there toxic chat. Why does Riot continue to allow this ? I believe it to be GREED, they know most likely that person will end up buying skins or champs for the new account and this is 100% the reason perma chat restrictions do not exist. When perma bans are actually perma bans then one would have reason to believe there reasoning. Until then it is not hard to see through the lies of Riot Games.
Not to mention the sheer volume of people who start out as friendly helpful people in this game. After years of being continuously provoked end up snapping and get punished, while the provokers who feed and troll and make there little comments continue to get off free.
There are 2 possibilities here, Riot is actually so greedy they do not wish to improve the system or there is a complete lack of logical thinking in Riots behavioral dept.
Either way Riot continues to fail its customers.
Jubbinaut1 votes[{quoted}](name=Kat Head,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=ckYH3Vtp,comment-id=00050004,timestamp=2015-11-21T02:41:18.230+0000)
But they dont play other games, they make smurfs and do it all over again.
While I would certainly grant that some do this, I'd need some significant evidence to believe that even a majority do - much less the totality that your statement implies.
Care to present such evidence?
When perma bans are actually perma bans then one would have reason to believe there reasoning.
And how do you propose they do that?
Kat Head1 votesWhile I would certainly grant that some do this, I'd need some significant evidence to believe that even a majority do - much less the totality that your statement implies.
Care to present such evidence?
And how do you propose they do that?
I would think an ip ban would do wonders (but honestly I have no clue how to accomplish this). I also think the number of account re rolls is much higher than you think it is.
Jubbinaut1 votes[{quoted}](name=Kat Head,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=ckYH3Vtp,comment-id=0005000400000000,timestamp=2015-11-21T12:21:00.917+0000)
I would think an ip ban would do wonders (but honestly I have no clue how to accomplish this).
There are a couple major problems with IP bans.
First, they're really easy to get around. Between the ease of obtaining proxies (which falsify your IP) and the fact that most home connections use Dynamic IP (which means it's possible to change your IP address with little more than power-cycling the modem at worse, or waiting a week at best), IP bans simply don't affect the people they're intended to.
Second, they run the risk of massive collateral damage. The Dynamic IP problem in particular leaves a banned IP floating out there for someone else to receive. And that person would have no way of knowing why they suddenly couldn't connect to League. On top of that, there's the possibility of issuing IP bans against whole networks - meaning entire internet cafes or dormitories could be shut out. And while those people aren't playing? The guy who was supposed to be banned proxies in and moves on with his gaming.
This makes IP bans an almost entirely ineffective solution.
I also think the number of account re rolls is much higher than you think it is.
You're welcome to your opinion. But unless you're going to offer some non-anecdotal evidence to support it, I'm going to stick with mine.
Kat Head1 votesYou're welcome to your opinion. But unless you're going to offer some non-anecdotal evidence to support it, I'm going to stick with mine.
Nothing wrong with that.
I believe keeping those toxic dudes around in a state of not being able to be toxic would be far better. If they moved on to actually trolling games or feeding then sure, ban the sucker. It seems to me that so many of the banned people are really just frustrated people who care enough to get angry and simply do not know how to handle there anger.
Jubbinaut2 votes[{quoted}](name=Kat Head,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=ckYH3Vtp,comment-id=000500040000000000000000,timestamp=2015-11-22T01:20:45.899+0000)
I believe keeping those toxic dudes around in a state of not being able to be toxic would be far better. If they moved on to actually trolling games or feeding then sure, ban the sucker. It seems to me that so many of the banned people are really just frustrated people who care enough to get angry and simply do not know how to handle there anger.
Sure. But why would not being able to talk make them more able to handle their anger? Seems to me that would just impose a new point of frustration for them - which would exacerbate the problem, and likely lead to new ways of acting out.
I could be wrong there, but I do speak from a position of experience in this. I grew up with pretty significant anger problems - it's only been relatively recently (the last 5 years or so) that I've been capable of dealing with it appropriately. During those years (and there were a lot of them), being silenced only led to me finding new ways to lash out - often more destructive and self-destructive ways.
I don't intend to propose that my experience is the same as everyone's, but it fits with my readings on similar psychological issues.
Kat Head1 votesSure.
I was undersized in elementary school. I guess this gave me big man syndrome or something because I was a super bully. I picked on kids 2 grades above and below me. This went on with me being punished and punished and punished with zero change in the way I behaved.
One day when I was in the 5th grade, one particular 6th grader whom I did not like irritated me (no idea how). I took his head and bashed it into a concrete window seal 3 times. This actually injured him physically, more than just a black eye or broke nose because fighting and minor injuries such as those were common place in my youth. He actually needed stitches and was very loopy when I stopped smashing his head into the window seal.
It was at this EXACT point in time that I stopped being a bully. Whatever anger and rage had motivated me to fight (just for the fun of it many times) was immediately gone. It was not the blood pouring from his head that bothered me (again, in my youth fighting was just part of recess) but the look in his eyes. He was hurt, scared and humiliated all at the same time while being confused (loopy). Compassion and sorrow flooded my thought process and I was actually changed at that exact moment in time. I have been in a few fights since that time but all of them were noble or in defense of my person.
Since this point in my childhood I have had a heart for the weak and the helpless.
This is one of the problems with the internet, people do not see the actual harm that there words inflict. It is very easy for Riot to dismiss toxic people as the problem, but I am arguing that many times those very people are also the victims. This is why I cannot help but argue the unpopular opinion. If these people were confined into a area (perma chat banned) where they do others no more harm (and could be monitored much more closely than new smurf accounts), it just might be that they will realize the error of the path they are walking. Banning them does nothing more than make them more angry and hostile. I think when people are addicted enough to this game to type out some of the things they get banned for, creating a new account to continue (and they are now even more angry ) is a no brainer for them.
Jubbinaut2 votes[{quoted}](name=Kat Head,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=ckYH3Vtp,comment-id=00050004000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2015-11-22T02:08:08.126+0000)
It was at this EXACT point in time that I stopped being a bully. Whatever anger and rage had motivated me to fight (just for the fun of it many times) was immediately gone. It was not the blood pouring from his head that bothered me (again, in my youth fighting was just part of recess) but the look in his eyes. He was hurt, scared and humiliated all at the same time while being confused (loopy). Compassion and sorrow flooded my thought process and I was actually changed at that exact moment in time. I have been in a few fights since that time but all of them were noble or in defense of my person.
While I respect your story, I'm afraid I don't really understand how your recognition of the effect you were having on others - and therefore your choice to no longer have that effect - is reflected in your plan here.
Because you aren't talking about showing these people the harm they're causing others. You're talking about sticking that angry kid in a room by himself.
Think back to those years. Do you think that it would have done you a lick of good to have your voice silenced, your ability to express yourself removed? Or do you think that, perhaps, it would have made you more mad - and perhaps led to you finding new ways to express yourself. Possibly more destructive and harmful ways?
This is one of the problems with the internet, people do not see the actual harm that there words inflict. It is very easy for Riot to dismiss toxic people as the problem, but I am arguing that many times those very people are also the victims.
I don't see how Riot dismisses them. Their systems are tuned to give these players chances to reflect on their behavior, to learn new ways of behaving, and to recognize how they're seen by other people - the exact types of things that helped you.
But it's important to recognize that this doesn't work for everyone - to steal a quote: "Some men just want to watch the world burn."
And those, in general, are the players that permabans are for.
This is why I cannot help but argue the unpopular opinion. If these people were confined into a area (perma chat banned) where they do others no more harm (and could be monitored much more closely than new smurf accounts), it just might be that they will realize the error of the path they are walking.
Psychological studies indicate that this is highly unlikely. Rather, silencing the method of communication they're already using will most commonly simply lead to them developing new - and possibly more destructive - methods of communicating their displeasure.
Which - per your intentions - would lead to them getting banned anyway. But only after ruining more games for more players.
Banning them does nothing more than make them more angry and hostile. I think when people are addicted enough to this game to type out some of the things they get banned for, creating a new account to continue (and they are now even more angry ) is a no brainer for them.
But you think that being silenced won't make them more angry and hostile? You think that shifting to intentionally feeding/griefing (which requires far less effort than creating a whole new account) wouldn't be an obvious next step?
I dunno, I just think it's funny that we're referring to the exact same behavioral patterns as evidence, but shifting to new forms of toxicity would seem to require a lot less work to me.
Kat Head1 votesI dunno, I just think it's funny that we're referring to the exact same behavioral patterns as evidence, but shifting to new forms of toxicity would seem to require a lot less work to me.
I guess we are just going to have to agree to disagree. We have both said the same thing several different ways now. ;p
o Maui o9 votesLeague is not open to anyone and everyone. League is open to anyone and everyone who agrees to, and abides by, Riot's terms of service. If someone is incapable of abiding by those terms, even if those reasons are outside of their control, that someone should not be playing League.
B Luv1 votesOkay, so here's another thing for you to think about. Go play any other online game that has adult content, which would be beer, involving gragas, tits which involves every single girl champ in the game, etc. If people are going to play an adult contented game them they should be able to handle adult contented language.
Zombiemaster6 votesAdulted contented language, like cursing? Well guess what, Riot allows cursing in this game. Saying something like "fuck, i missed that skillshot" or "shit, he barely got away" is indeed allowed and not punishable. However, if you are going to use these words (or any other words for that matter) to abuse chat and harass other players, that's what Riot doesn't allow and that's what is punished.
Simply put, it's not the words you say, but how you use them.
B Luv2 votesYou're definitely right, I have no argument there, but why cant riot just permanently ban their chat logs instead of their account? People are giving riot shitty and terrible reviews because of this banning system. People pay money to play this game, even thought it is free to play, I understand that taking away someones chat privileges permanently may hurt a team if that person isn't toxic towards players, but if someone is super toxic towards a team verbally then their chat being taken away would do nothing to hurt the team, it would only benefit the team for him to not be able to speak.
SmokedAlmonds4 votes[{quoted}](name=B Luv,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=ckYH3Vtp,comment-id=0007000000000000,timestamp=2015-11-21T00:31:44.768+0000)
You're definitely right, I have no argument there, but why cant riot just permanently ban their chat logs instead of their account? People are giving riot shitty and terrible reviews because of this banning system. People pay money to play this game, even thought it is free to play, I understand that taking away someones chat privileges permanently may hurt a team if that person isn't toxic towards players, but if someone is super toxic towards a team verbally then their chat being taken away would do nothing to hurt the team, it would only benefit the team for him to not be able to speak.
It benefits that team even more to have a different person who isn't chat restricted.
Zombiemaster5 votesHere's the deal with that.
If a player reaches the point where Riot permanently bans their account, that player has been punished multiple times but has ignored those punishments and continued behaving that way. At this point, Riot believes that this player has no intent on changing their behavior, so they permanently ban them. However, if they just take away their chat permanently, then this player (who again, has shown no intent to reform their behavior) will very likely just find another way to be "toxic" to his teammates. Since he/she can no longer do this through chat, they will do it through other ways such as intentionally feeding, afking, or basically trolling through gameplay instead of chat.
ModWuks5 votesHey again B Luv,
You have to keep in mind that the chat restrictions are applied to reform the player, and less so to punish the player. If a player is permanently chat restricted, then there's really no reform going on with that player. By the time a player is permanently suspended, they've already been plenty toxic to warrant the punishment and are generally beyond reform.
B Luv1 votesYes but take this into consideration. What if the player has a disability to where he can't filter his mind in being toxic such as, tourettes, or even being a sociopath. Just because he cusses doesn't mean he should't be able to play a game he loves. Simply taking away their chat privileges would be the simplest form of reducing toxicity. Think about it, most players are toxic as hell, but if you ban them and they dont get to say anything, they will still play in the game and wont be able to bitch at you. I just think Rioters are being dicks for completely banning someone who has played the game for so long. I mean I understand banning someone for DDosing or even boosting, but for cussing at someone when they can just easily take away their priveleges makes SO much more sense.
ModWuks3 votesToxicity appears in many forms: offensive language, negative attitude, intentionally feeding, leaving the game/afk. A player who is negative can always find another way to create a negative environment for other players.
B Luv1 votesRegardless of "finding a negatvie way." There is no way to have offensive language, or even a negative attitude towards your team if you have no way to communicate with them. And about the intentionally feeding and leaving the game part, the only way for someone to "intentionally feed" is by repeatedly running to the same person on purpose, or to simply state, "I am feeding" and then feed. And people who dont have chat restrictions leave games all the time and dont get banned.
ModUlanopo2 votes[{quoted}](name=B Luv,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=ckYH3Vtp,comment-id=0001000100000000,timestamp=2015-11-20T23:35:01.384+0000)
There is no way to have offensive language, or even a negative attitude towards your team if you have no way to communicate with them.
While this is technically true, permanently disabled chat isn't really a solution to verbal toxicity because it addresses the symptoms and not the disease. As Wuks mentioned, someone who is upset, frustrated or simply doesn't care can always find other ways to be toxic.
There were some very interesting studies a few years back that showed that venting in a safe, controlled environment didn't lead to less loss of control incidents. It led to more. It makes sense when you think about it. Developing self-control requires discipline and practice. Put another way, you don't practice eating healthy by treating yourself to a whole pie after a good weigh-in.
Riot uses chat restrictions as a way to identify people who are incapable of change, then they ban those people and ask them to play other games.
CrisisEchoes1 votesWhile this is technically true, permanently disabled chat isn't really a solution to verbal toxicity because it addresses the symptoms and not the disease. As Wuks mentioned, someone who is upset, frustrated or simply doesn't care can always find other ways to be toxic.
There were some very interesting studies a few years back that showed that venting in a safe, controlled environment didn't lead to less loss of control incidents. It led to more. It makes sense when you think about it. Developing self-control requires discipline and practice. Put another way, you don't practice eating healthy by treating yourself to a whole pie after a good weigh-in.
Riot uses chat restrictions as a way to identify people who are incapable of change, then they ban those people and ask them to play other games.
I may be a rare case, but My attitude pertains to chat only. I have NEVER intentionally fed, or afked(bathroom/emergency/random dorm fire alarm test excluded), but I am abhorrently toxic on occasion, to the point I have been permaed. I think... people put way too much of a focus on people being toxic. I just simply become very vulgar outloud instead of ingame. Call me immature, or whatever, but I have really bad anger issues. People who havent gone through the shit I went through as a kid wouldent understand anger issues. My anger would never manifest into something that would waste others time. Making the assumption that it would is wrong.
ModUlanopo3 votesI just simply become very vulgar outloud instead of ingame.
This post on catharsis might explain what I'm talking about.
Basically, allowing yourself to act out - even in an environment where it's okay to do so - makes it more likely that you will do so in any environment. This is one of the reasons why Riot can't permanently disable chat for people who abuse it. They will likely move on to other forms of toxicity and they will never get the opportunity to develop discipline in the proper format.
CrisisEchoes1 votesThis post on catharsis might explain what I'm talking about.
Basically, allowing yourself to act out - even in an environment where it's okay to do so - makes it more likely that you will do so in any environment. This is one of the reasons why Riot can't permanently disable chat for people who abuse it. They will likely move on to other forms of toxicity and they will never get the opportunity to develop discipline in the proper format.
That philosophy is wrong in my opinion. Most people do not enjoy wasting their time, and trolling is a direct waste of time. I do not like losing games, and i'm not going to intentionally throw a game. Maby vs people who really want to make other people on their team lose and waste time, it might be true. But for the large majority of toxic players I think its wrong.
The worst thing that happens due to toxicity is my focus on the game diminishes, and i play worse. But to throw a game because i cannot chat? No. That is wrong in my situation personally.
o Maui o4 votesThe disability you are referring to is a vocal tic. It is literally an involuntary action.
Harassing someone in League requires several voluntary actions--opening the chat box, typing something out, and sending it. It's a very different animal from Tourette syndrome and they are really not comparable things. I am not aware of a disability that could manifest itself in an uncontrollable compulsion to type horrible things.
If there is such a player who must compulsively type offensive and harassing things to strangers in an online game, that player can still solve the problem using workarounds such as unbinding their enter key while playing League. If a player genuinely lacks the ability to recognize that verbally abusing people is not OK in society, then they probably should not be participating in a team game.
B Luv2 votesRegardless if they should be able to participate or not, League is open to ANYONE and EVERYONE, so basically if that person gets banned for being who they are then League is not open to ANYONE and EVERYONE, only people who are perfect and never get mad. Which in its self is bullshit, because no one is perfect and if you don't like someone in a match just mute them, and if you dont mute them then thats your choice to adhere to their toxicity. If you mute them then they no longer will be able to bother you.
SmokedAlmonds3 votes[{quoted}](name=B Luv,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=ckYH3Vtp,comment-id=00060000,timestamp=2015-11-21T00:14:44.208+0000)
Regardless if they should be able to participate or not, League is open to ANYONE and EVERYONE, so basically if that person gets banned for being who they are then League is not open to ANYONE and EVERYONE, only people who are perfect and never get mad. Which in its self is bullshit, because no one is perfect and if you don't like someone in a match just mute them, and if you dont mute them then thats your choice to adhere to their toxicity. If you mute them then they no longer will be able to bother you.
League is open to anyone who follows the rules.
Playing league is a privilege, not a right.
Sneak Dog1 votesIf you have to mute someone, then the majority of the damage has already been done.
Horse Grenades2 votesThere should definitely me some form of reimbursement. I manage movie theaters, and if we remove someone for behavior from a showing we must provide a refund.
ModUlanopo4 votes[{quoted}](name=ApocaIypse Meow,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=ckYH3Vtp,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2015-11-20T23:12:26.528+0000)
There should definitely me some form of reimbursement. I manage movie theaters, and if we remove someone for behavior from a showing we must provide a refund.
Even putting aside the contractual differences (the local theaters' Terms of Use agreements are not the same as Riot's), can you imagine the situation this would create:
"I'm bored with League and I would like my $500 back. Guess I'll have to be an absolute douche so they ban me."
Horse Grenades1 votesAppreciate the response, that's why I wouldn't recommend a full reimbursement. However, I think some form of reimbursement, not that it would have to directly represent the value of the money, but maybe access to a level 30 account with no champs or IP, an access to Riot merchandise coupon. Once again, these are all terrible ideas, people smarter than me would have to figure all that stuff out.
Also, someone agreeing to terms don't make the terms themselves ethical (ask the 2008 subprime mortgage crisis amirite?!) lol
Edit: I am putting these ideas out here not thought through (like most of the internet) and just spitballing for the sake of my wife not being home and enjoying conversation) :)
ModUlanopo2 votes[{quoted}](name=ApocaIypse Meow,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=ckYH3Vtp,comment-id=000000010000,timestamp=2015-11-21T01:17:46.276+0000)
Appreciate the response, that's why I wouldn't recommend a full reimbursement. However, I think some form of reimbursement, not that it would have to directly represent the value of the money, but maybe access to a level 30 account with no champs or IP, an access to Riot merchandise coupon. Once again, these are all terrible ideas, people smarter than me would have to figure all that stuff out.
Riot's a bit different from other gaming companies. They come right out and say that they would prefer that people who have been banned find other things to do with their time.
Also, someone agreeing to terms don't make the terms themselves ethical (ask the 2008 subprime mortgage crisis amirite?!) lol
But it also doesn't make them unethical. :)
The point was that the terms are different because we're talking about, well, two different things. Not only do the courts have a long way to go in terms of making rulings on internet stuff, but the scope is really different.
Edit: I am putting these ideas out here not thought through (like most of the internet) and just spitballing for the sake of my wife not being home and enjoying conversation) :)
Nah, it's all good. Discussions like this are what the board is for.
Samus723 votes[{quoted}](name=ApocaIypse Meow,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=ckYH3Vtp,comment-id=000000010000,timestamp=2015-11-21T01:17:46.276+0000)
Appreciate the response, that's why I wouldn't recommend a full reimbursement. However, I think some form of reimbursement, not that it would have to directly represent the value of the money, but maybe access to a level 30 account with no champs or IP, an access to Riot merchandise coupon. Once again, these are all terrible ideas, people smarter than me would have to figure all that stuff out.
Also, someone agreeing to terms don't make the terms themselves ethical (ask the 2008 subprime mortgage crisis amirite?!) lol
Rewarding someone who repeatedly violates the rules is not appropriate. "Hello, Mr. Johnston. You've gotten your fifth speeding ticket. You've lost your license but we'll still let you drive your car." /rolleyes
Are you seriously comparing unethical mortgage rates to the rules you must follow to play a video game? Video games do not have an adverse affects on lives. Unfair banking practices do. And frankly, if you find the ToS so unethical, why do you keep clicking "I agree?"
Don't cuss people out. Don't harass people. Don't purposely leave games. Yes. These are VERY unethical rules to follow. Ugh. Did I just respond to this drivel?
Horse Grenades3 votes1.) Thanks for the response. (drivel? really?) 2.) You act like it's ridiculous to compare unethical ToS to unethical banking, then you compare to criminal cases? (double standard much?) 3.) I don't think anyone is saying to "reward" their behavior but they have invested a lot of time and money and the investment is directly responsible for the success of the company. To use your speeding analogy the same cops would respond to you needing help because you pay their salary with your tax investment.
4.) All that being said, obviously they broke rules that they agreed to follow, but I do have sympathy for people who have anger issues or parents who promoted that behavior or never taught them reason or anger management strategies. I would like to see it easier for people permabanned to begin new accounts (maybe spot them some free champs or runes or something) and try to change. Regardless if Lyte agrees, sometimes a big kick in the pants is a good wake up call
Sneak Dog1 votes4.) Regardless if Lyte agrees, sometimes a big kick in the pants is a good wake up call
The big kick has already been done. One doesn't get permabanned for toxicity out of the blue. There's warnings and temporary bans. Riot has already told you to change your behavior or you'll get permabanned.
Horse Grenades1 votesI appreciate your response, but I disagree. I look at it like this if you are in or nearly in a really bad car accident (temp. ban or restriction) it has an (a?)effect on your for a short period of time. However, were you to get diagnosed with a terminal illness you look at each day much differently, and if you lost a lot but were able to gain something back on the other side of the illness then I think the chance of reform is MUCH higher.
Like I said, this is just my opinion, and I probably ere on the side of "grace" too much and not "punishment."
Sneak Dog1 votesI look at it like this if you are in or nearly in a really bad car accident (temp. ban or restriction) it has an (a?)effect on your for a short period of time.
If you get in a car accident because of your bad driving, you better improve your driving skills or you might not survive the next one. And in this comparison, the accident is definitely caused by your bad driving.
However, were you to get diagnosed with a terminal illness you look at each day much differently, and if you lost a lot but were able to gain something back on the other side of the illness then I think the chance of reform is MUCH higher.
You're basically told: if you don't improve your behavior, you'll get permanently banned.
As far as I know, a permaban is almost always preceded by a two-week ban. You have fourteen days to ponder over this fact and realise that you shouldn't be so toxic. That your behavior in the game is not ok. If you then still want to play the game, but don't change, then I don't know what will make you change.
I don't think the comparison with a terminal illness is fair. A terminal illness has no known cure and generally means you die in the coming six months (I checked it on wikipedia to get the exact meaning). It also makes me confused about your comment:
and if you lost a lot but were able to gain something back on the other side of the illness then I think the chance of reform is MUCH higher.
How would you reform after losing to a terminal illness? It wouldn't be a terminal illness in that case, would it? (Lets not get into a religious debate about heaven/reincarnation etc.)
Like I said, this is just my opinion, and I probably ere on the side of "grace" too much and not "punishment."
I like discussions. I find them fun and they can be very enlightening. And obviously we are talking from our own personal perspectives here. My apologies if I misunderstood your previous post and feel free to clear up anything I might've misunderstood. ("An effect" btw. You have it right. Though I believe it's "to err on a side.")
Horse Grenades1 votesI think what I'm saying is that with your next life or second acct or whatever hopefully you would reform
EvilDustMan2 votesWhy are you so hung up on this chat thing.
The Rioter said 'you threatened to feed'. If you didn't have chat, you might have just fed anyways. So chat banning wouldn't have helped, you would have been toxic in a different way. You are the PERFECT EXAMPLE of why chat banning doesn't work.
You are PROOF that we need to ban people instead of just removing their ability to speak.
Kat Head1 votesWhy are you so hung up on this chat thing.
The Rioter said 'you threatened to feed'. If you didn't have chat, you might have just fed anyways. So chat banning wouldn't have helped, you would have been toxic in a different way. You are the PERFECT EXAMPLE of why chat banning doesn't work.
You are PROOF that we need to ban people instead of just removing their ability to speak.
You do not know he would have fed. Most people do not start toxic, they are provoked into toxicity.
Riot might as well remove chat completely since they are removing solo queue.
EvilDustMan2 votes[{quoted}](name=Kat Head,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=ckYH3Vtp,comment-id=000a0000,timestamp=2015-11-21T02:44:14.303+0000)
You do not know he would have fed. Most people do not start toxic, they are provoked into toxicity.
Riot might as well remove chat completely since they are removing solo queue.
Nothing really excuses attempting to forfeit a game for the rest of the players.
And why are chat and solo queue connected? Those don't really have any bearing on the other.
Kat Head1 votesNothing really excuses attempting to forfeit a game for the rest of the players.
And why are chat and solo queue connected? Those don't really have any bearing on the other.
In this scenario no one attempted that, they threatened it. If he was perma chat banned he would not threaten it again.
Riot is running off solo players, everyone will be in some type of voice with there duo, trio etc. No reason to even have a chat box in game now, except for the premade groups to harass the solo players that stubbornly keep playing.
EvilDustMan1 votes[{quoted}](name=Kat Head,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=ckYH3Vtp,comment-id=000a000000000000,timestamp=2015-11-21T02:56:35.619+0000)
In this scenario no one attempted that, they threatened it. If he was perma chat banned he would not threaten it again.
Riot is running off solo players, everyone will be in some type of voice with there duo, trio etc. No reason to even have a chat box in game now, except for the premade groups to harass the solo players that stubbornly keep playing.
You are talking about not assuming scenarios that haven't happened, yet you are assuming imaginary scenarios where every queue has voice but the one premade and will surely be toxic.
Remember, almost all queues now have one some form of premade, either duo, trio, or quartet, and you never notice. Only the 4-mans have toxicity problems, not all of them, and they have measures so you can punish them for ganging up on you.